Who do you agree with??

I say the first one simply because I don’t think babies really have arches at that age. I’m probably wrong, but Ben’s feet are so chubby, there is no arch at all, so what would I be supporting??? Plus, I can tell that he walks better and less wobbly when he is in his socks or bare feet vs. his shoes. I think they need that extra balance at first.

We don’t do shoes in the house. I don’t know if it’s right, it’s just what we prefer. Dh and I don’t wear our shoes in the house and Kaelyn always wants to do what we do (and Alex likes to do what Kaelyn does!)

we all take our shoes off when we walk in the door. my house is all wood floor & tile and the thought of everybody tracking ‘outside’ dirt through the house makes me crazy. I am not a neat freak, far from it! You should see my clutter

I’m not a physio, but I’ve worked with a lot of physios (I’m an OT) and Hailey had experience with pediatric physio as well. My understanding is that early on, it’s better not to wear shoes- helps them to facilitate balance and learn to walk well. So, no shoes inside the house. The only time they need shoes is when they go outside and will be walking where their feet can get injured by things on the ground. My understanding was that she shoe was really for protection, rather than arch support at that age. As they get a bit older and are involved in a lot of sports etc, then I have tried to get them a pair of good fitting shoes.

with all of my kids i don’t think this is an issue that was an issue to me. my kids had feet that were too fat for shoes—-elliot’s first pair was a size 4. i didn’t put shoes on them much when they were little—-mostly only for church and even then, only because they were cute. kevieb2008-01-18 15:47:13

I was always told to keep Isaac barefoot until he could walk well